Via Drudge. As I recall/am reminded, something like this happened before the ‘assault weapons ban’ in the 1990s. I don’t remember much about then – I was on the Other Side, and guns weren’t really my top issue anyway* – but the magazine thing in particular was apparently pretty straightforward; when the companies that made sturdy metal boxes got told that they’d be banned from making anymore sturdy metal boxes over a particular size, said companies went right out and made as many sturdy metal boxes as they could before the ban took effect. Then they sold them at high prices. Absolutely pointless, in other words – but gun violence declined anyway, as has been happening for the last twenty years or so, assault weapon ban or not…

But this can easily turn into a rant. Suffice it to say: I don’t know what it is about guns that abstractly** frightens the anti-gun crowd, but I wish that they’d get counseling for it.

Moe Lane

*Still isn’t, really. I can just read the damned Amendment, and it’s pretty damned clear and straightforward.

**I can totally understand being concretely frightened about a loaded and cocked gun that’s being aimed at your stomach. It’s being afraid of the idea of guns that bemuses.

If I may take a stab at why the anti-gun crowd is abstractly frightened by ’em…
Guns symbolically represent the power of the individual, the ability of the individual to self-determinate (if that is a word). They are not afraid of the gun per se as much as they are afraid of people who think differently (and not just homicidal maniacs) having the will and ability to live out those life choices. How else do you explain that Bloomberg founded that mayors against guns group AND constantly tries to ban “bad for you” foods? He is afraid of people making choices that he disagrees with.